4.1 Article

Accumulation of abdominal fat in relation to selected proinflammatory cytokines concentrations in non-obese Wroclaw inhabitants

期刊

ENDOKRYNOLOGIA POLSKA
卷 65, 期 6, 页码 449-455

出版社

VIA MEDICA
DOI: 10.5603/EP.2014.0062

关键词

metabolically obese but normal weight subjects; subclinical inflammation; proinflammatory cytokines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Metabolically obese normal weight (MONW) subjects, despite their normal BMI, present metabolic disturbances characteristic of abdominal obesity. One of the reasons might be subclinical inflammation caused by the fat tissue excess. The aim of this study was to assess the association between the accumulation of fat (especially abdominal) and the concentration of selected proinflammatory cytokines - interleukins (IL-6, IL-18) and C-reactive protein (CRP). Methods and methods: The study population consisted of 342 subjects (218 women, 124 men; age 20-40 years, BMI < 27 kg/m(2)) recruited from a community centre in Wroclaw. The group was divided based on the homeostasis assessment insulin resistance index (HOMA) value: 90 MONW subjects with HOMA > 1.69 and 252 subjects as control group. Anthropometric parameters, serum IL-6, IL-18, CRP, glucose, insulin concentrations and insulin sensitivity/resistance indexes were evaluated. Results: CRP levels were significantly higher (3.26 vs. 1.97, p = 0.03) in MONW women than in the control group. Serum IL-6, IL-18 levels in males and females did not differ in both groups. IL-6 showed a significant correlation with the abdominal to gynoidal fat tissue deposit ratio in women. There were correlations between the CRP and BMI, WHR, waist circumference, total fat, abdominal fat deposit, and abdominal to gynoidal fat deposit ratio in both sexes. In women, positive correlations between CRP and HOMA, FIRI and negative with QUICKI index were present. Conclusions: Increased accumulation of abdominal adipose tissue in non-obese, young and healthy subjects is related to increased CRP levels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据